Whose voice is this

It is strange why Russia has not yet decided to pass the stage of traditional representative democracy, with which nothing really turns out anything, and immediately move on to the democracy of the straight line. To catch up and overtake Switzerland and Liechtenstein, which are considered world leaders in referenda and plebiscites, often solving not the largest, but disturbing the population of the problems of national being, not to mention the issues of serious - changes in the constitution and so on.

In Russia, for a start, a nationwide referendum on immigrants could be held. Then - about prices for goods and services, about nationalization, then about the application of the death penalty, on censorship, about freedom of travel abroad. About relations with Ukraine and NATO and so on. The president of the country will then say something to his foreign, and internal critics: are you against democracy? Do you dare to object to popular will? What are you after this democrats?

Most will support the gap with Ukraine and NATO countries, will lead to the closure of the border along the Soviet model

According to some of these problems, there are sociological studies showing the attitude of society towards them, according to others, I have only my own observations and hear voices, louder, more confident in social networks. But on these grounds, it can still be assumed what the outcome of such referenda will be. Most will express the mass expulsion of immigrants and defeat in the rights of those who still remain. For hard state control over the prices of consumer goods. And, of course, for the nationalization of privatized enterprises. As for relations with the outside world, it is difficult to doubt that the majority will support the gap with Ukraine and NATO countries. He will lead to the closure of the border along the Soviet model (after all, the vast majority abroad never happened, and is not going to, and the ride "back and forth of all sorts of whipping there" is very annoying). Of course, the people of Russia will decisively speak out for the restoration and the widespread use of the death penalty. Will vote for the introduction of censorship in the media. Well, it is quite logical - for the lifelong presidency of Vladimir Putin and the further expansion of his powers, for example, in the legislative field. After all, polls show: the population has no confidence in the Duma, it will be happy to refuse it. Let Putin adopt laws, and with him you can have some beautifully named advisory organ.

That is, according to the totality of decisions, this will be a vote for the return of Russia to the regime of the absolute monarchy and in the late Middle Ages. But nothing can be done: the voice of the people is the voice of God, isn't it? Or is it not necessary?

Western political thought has recently been more critical of the idea of referenda. Very often they not only do not solve problems, but, conversely, exacerbate them. Scottish only postponed the final settlement of independence. Public opinion is changeable as the wind of May: in Denmark and Iceland, the population either rejected pan -European agreements, or accepted them with repeated voting. In the same Switzerland, the referendum decided to rob freedom of entry into the country from the EU, greatly complicating relations with neighbors, so the country's critical economic interests were at risk. In California, referendum participants demanded simultaneously a decrease in taxes and increase in expenses and, thereby, put their staff in an impossible position. According to the journal "Economist" , "Direct Democracy cannot magically cancel the laws of mathematics."

But at the same time, the fashion for referendums and plebiscites grow. In comparison with the seventies years, their number in Europe has grown about three times. And this, of course, is not an accident, this is one of the symptoms of almost widespread disappointment of the working masses in representative democracy. And, by the way, in modern political science and in general in any logia. I even risk assuming, in analytical and rational thinking in general.

It is amazing what coincidences are. Russia and the West exist in different historical phases, went from different sides and in different ways, but came to something similar. At least in one important attitude. One way or another, but the masses were everywhere in a state of painful excitement. The difference, however, is that in Russia it is induced from above. And in the West - there is a product of fermentation at a turning point in history, when a significant part of society is nervous, frightened by incomprehensible changes.

The numbers and facts are indifferent to them, they reject any calls from the threshold to vote for the country to stay in the EU

The brightest examples of this are the explosive, unprecedented popularity of the outsider Trump in the United States and the Brazczit movement in the UK, which achieves at all costs - the release of the United Kingdom from the European Union. This is nostalgia in its former greatness, in terms of stability and predictability of a past life, which disappears in front of the English (namely English, not British) "especiallyness". The charming originality of Albion is increasingly compatible with the economy of the global village, with the information revolution, with digital modeling, and further the following automation and cybernetization. Yes, and with the Internet and tyranny of social networks too. Although, in a paradoxical way, the latter are also widely used to mobilize supporters of Brexit. Probably, to the majority is uncomfortable (these feelings of anxiety and longing for the good old England are not alien to me). But the enlightened bourgeoisie and the intelligentsia hold themselves in their hands. They do not give vague emotions to get the upper hand over the diet. However, on the right flank of the privileged, upper class, exactly the gall bladder broke through. These people have eyes, they are shaking the fever. I never thought that I would see among the British gentlemen such a frantic fanaticism. However, these people in numerically will probably not be a percentage of the total population. And they would not have been able to captivate half the country if their cry did not find a living response in the lower, wide foundation of the social pyramid.

I don’t know how to judge from personal experience, but the English workers with whom I manage to communicate do not want to hear any arguments, they are indifferent to the numbers and facts, they reject any calls to vote from the threshold for the country to stay in the EU. They, like other convinced EuroSceptics, are deaf to the exhortations of the leaders of almost all the friendly Britain countries who believe that Brexit will be a catastrophe for both the country and its allies. That only enemies will be delighted with this outcome - the so -called "Islamic state" and the Kremlin. They do not act on those who have decided everything for themselves in advance, and the frightening figures of the economic effect of an unfriendly divorce from the European Union. 88 percent of the recognized, respected economists of Britain do not doubt the serious consequences of Brexit for the country and the standard of living of the population in the short term. The slightly smaller, but still the clear majority (72 percent) are also confident in the negative effect of leaving the EU in the long term for a long -term. The amazing, unprecedented unanimous representatives of different, usually warring among themselves, never seemed to be able to agree on the directions of economic thought. Moreover, the leadership of the British trade unions (and after them the leaders of the Labor Party) basically also calls for its members to vote against Brexit. But, apparently, workers, especially not having highly qualified, perceive such calls skeptical. Their rebellious sentiments can be understood: the new economy is merciless for them, their income does not grow, or even fall, their material and social status is increasingly behind the employees of ubiquitous information technologies, urban intelligentsia and the middle class.

This is exactly known from the polls this is: the more educated and the younger the person, the less likely it will support the country's departure from the EU. But usually it is these categories of citizens that are not inclined to go to voting areas. Unlike pensioners and middle class (part of which was also imbued with the idea of "restoration of sovereignty"). Who will be more active this time? The outcome of the referendum depends on this.

The voice of the people is far from always - the voice of God. Back in the VIII century, Alcuin Yorksky warned against the false persuasiveness of this spectacular saying. “An excited crowd is always on the verge of madness,” he said. A very accurate formulation: it is at the time of the abnormal excitement of the mass that the fate of society begins, at normal time, normal people are absorbed in their everyday affairs, in extreme cases, the solution of local issues, they have no business to big policy.

Readers Daily Telegraph on the newspaper’s website answered the question: what do you think will win in the referendum: supporters of leaving the EU, those who would like to stay in the Union, or ... Satan? It is clear that "DT" is a right -wing publication that is quite far from the political center. Therefore, the opinion of his audience does not necessarily reflect the overall picture. But what are the results of the vote: 68 percent predicted the victory - Euroskeptics, 24 - euro -films, and eight - Lucifer. I voted for the high probability of Satan’s victory. Not because I wish her, there is no at all, but because I am sure that the referendum in any case will leave the split British society deeply injured, and these wounds will not quickly drag out.

If you drag out at all.

Andrey Ostalsky - London political commentator

Opinions expressed under the heading "Law" may not reflect the point of view of the editorial office